Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Story Post: [General’s Order] Tell me how you really feel

The list is massive specificially so people can post disputes against various orders, please don’t dispute all the oders, and give me an idea, in your dispute, whether you’re wanting a loyalty gain/loss

1. Soldiers shall not participate in a skirmish without attacking
2. Soldiers shall not attack without killing at least one enemy combatant
3. Soldiers shall not complain about changes in loyalty
4. Soldiers shall not post in a report against the loyalty of another soldier unless they are disputing that report..
5. Soldiers shall not report the General
6. Soldiers with a loyalty of over 30 shall not, if they are able to prevent it, allow an action that needs to be reported to go unreported for more than 72 hours.
7. Soldiers with a loyalty of under 30 shall not report a soldier with a loyalty higher then their own.
8. Soldiers with a loyalty of less than 0 shall not use the phrase General in any of their posts or comments after this order is placed.
9. Soldiers shall not be without a weapon.

10. Soldiers with the position of Medic shall not allow another soldier to die.
11. Soldiers with the letter E in their name shall not have a loyalty of above 50.

12. Soldiers with the letter A in their name shall not have a loyalty of below -50
13. Soldiers shall not post any comments or questions that imply that there is no enemy, save for in reports concerning this rule.
14. Soldiers shall not question the loyalty of the Soldier Rodlen by reporting him.
15. Soldiers shall not mention the DDA in comments or posts.
16. Soldiers shall not vote on a proposals without including flavor text denoting the reasons for their vote.
17. Soldiers shall not possess more loyalty then their ammo.
18. Soldiers shall not possess more health then their ammo.
19. Soldiers shall not post a comment immediately after a comment which they have posted.

20. Soldiers shall not have a number of comments in this post greater than the number of comments the General has, so long as the general has at least 3 comments in this post.



02-24-2009 17:18:30 UTC

I dispute #4. It’s redundant, partly because the General is clearly the paragon of Loyalty himself so such breaches will never happen, partly because all the orders relate only to Soldiers and the General does not count as a common Soldier for the purposes of orders, and mostly because rule “2.7.2 Martial Law” does not allow the General to be reported in the first place. Removing the rule will therefore help ease the administrative load on the court-martial process, leaving more time for war, without negative side effects.


02-24-2009 17:24:43 UTC

Do you, perhaps, mean to dispute order #5 instead of order #4?


02-24-2009 17:25:35 UTC

Yes, that’s what I meant. Sorry, wrong number…


02-24-2009 17:55:24 UTC

Disputing #12
Reason: Darth Cliche.


02-24-2009 18:10:38 UTC

Disputing #19.
Reason: Soliders often make typos when making comments, or realize something after it was posted. While I can understand that for this post, applying it elsewhere is overkill.


02-24-2009 19:14:02 UTC

Darth Cliche -  against though I’m amused that it was you that did this, if you’d let the order remain undisputed, you would have dropped below -50, then just never had to do anything and always be breaking martial law.
Clucky -  for  Good point, should have limited it.


02-24-2009 19:23:23 UTC

Disputing Order #9 - New recruits should not be penalised during the short period between an admin handing out their uniform, and their first visit to the armoury.


02-24-2009 19:47:11 UTC

Disputing Order #11.

I have complete faith that there is a good reason that this order was placed. However, my parents blessed me with an unusual number of Es in my name. I do not feel this makes me incapable of being an Ideal Soldier; I realise I have yet to reach such heights of Loyalty, but I fear the day that a Soldier reports me for my name being inappropriate to my ideals and my understanding of the importance of our cause.

Please be considerate in your deliberations. My Loyalty is Absolute.


02-24-2009 21:38:51 UTC

Disputing: #‘s 18, 17, 11, 10, 6, and 2 because soldiers should not be penalized for things which are not in their control or things that are constantly changing.

Please try to keep my loyalty even by increasing my loyalty for some and decreasing my loyalty for others.

Disputing: #‘s 16, 15, 14, 7, 8 because several of these are random or unfair to certain players or DDA members or require explanations for every single vote in flavor text, which is annoying and unnessesery, or are unfairly restrictive.


02-24-2009 22:17:03 UTC

Kevin -  for It should be changed too allow oppurtunity to be armed.
Devenger -  for It wouldn’t do for such loyalty as yours to be limited.

Wak - Intentionally not responding, you disputed WAY to many orders in your post, and the issues are ones which were INTENTIONAL.  The rules are supposed to be restrictive and/or nearly impossible to avoid.  Next set of rules will build off of this one, and eventually it’s going to be difficult to post without breaking at least one regulation.


02-24-2009 22:38:38 UTC

Disputing #15.

The DDA must have clear lines of communication if it is to operate within the rigid army framework.


02-24-2009 23:00:22 UTC

I’ll wait 48 hour then…


02-24-2009 23:32:33 UTC

Or can I revoke it somehow? Because it seems pretty jerk-like to just wait and get rid of them.


02-24-2009 23:43:07 UTC

Disputing Order #17

Reason: We must be extremely loyal, and this order prevents that.


02-24-2009 23:47:41 UTC

Disputing Order #2

Reason: The dead must not be punished more for failing to defeat the enemy.  They work hard, so if they are killed before they can kill, they should not be punished for it.


02-24-2009 23:52:40 UTC

Please note that Wakky’s dispute has no effect.

“A soldier may post a comment in the Active Orders with the text “Disputing Order #X” where X is replaced by the number of the Order which they wish to dispute”

“18, 17, 11, 10, 6, and 2” is not a single order’s number.  Neither is “16, 15, 14, 7, 8”.


02-25-2009 00:03:04 UTC

And finally…

Disputing Order #18

Reason: In my humble opinion, I feel that bravely blowing the enemy to pieces with ammunition is very loyal.  We should not be punished for shooting our enemies.


02-25-2009 04:22:13 UTC

Disputing Order #10

Reasoning: As a medic, I am limited to one heal of two HP/ soldier/ skirmish. If I have already healed somone once or am not on, I have no way of saving a Soldier. Somtimes there is nothing to do other then let them die, so it is not the medic’s fault.

I would prefer to gain loyalty for this.


02-25-2009 04:28:55 UTC

Disputing Order #14

Reason: Rodlen has broken several of the orders. It sets a bad example for the new recruits.

—Also Wak, your Disputing half a million orders post wasn’t even a proper dispute post, as you did not do it in the form “Disputing Order #X”.


02-25-2009 04:32:49 UTC

Disputing Order #6

While I agree that loyal soldiers should do their best to report all problems to the general, because we are only allowed one such report per day we might find ourselves in a situation where there is too many acts of disloyalty for us to properly report within the alloted time frame.


02-25-2009 04:36:24 UTC

Disputing Order #15

Reason: Not thorough. DDF is still allowed.  DDG is.  DD* is.


02-25-2009 20:20:10 UTC

Note on #16:  This effectively bars anyone from voting on proposals, since Flavor Text can’t be “seen” by anything that affects the Gamestate.


02-27-2009 23:38:33 UTC

Note that this post no longer has any discernible effect on the Gamestate, the related rules having been repealed. I will leave this stickied for the time being, though another Admin can unsticky it if they like.


02-28-2009 11:32:09 UTC

Unstickying so as to not confuse the general population.